Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Montana Fishburne

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. An important consideration is that there is no agreement over whether the existing coverage is enough for her to meet WP:GNG. A lot of the "keep" !votes are very weak, but the "delete" !votes pertaining solely to WP:PORNBIO are also irrelevant if she meets GNG. Since this AfD does not establish that one way or another, we must conclude that there is no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:25, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Montana Fishburne[edit]

Montana Fishburne (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This BLP was brought to my attention through another AfD. As notability is not inherited, as it stands there are only two sources in this article, and at the present time this person has done nothing of note to date. Appearing in two porno films isn't enough to satisfy WP:GNG in my book. Whose Your Guy (talk) 10:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per WP:PORNBIO unless some verifiable evidence is presented of independent notability. --Moonriddengirl (talk)
  • Weak keep WP:NOTINHERITED, WP:PORNBIO and the number of films she's been in are irrelevant if she passes WP:GNG. She has had plenty of coverage, although it possibly violates WP:ONEVENT so far. Epbr123 (talk) 12:28, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. She doesn't meet the criteria within WP:PORNBIO or anything else that I see. She's only gaining attention in the press because of who her father is, rather than anything notable that she has accomplished. WP:NOTINHERITED Cindamuse (talk) 13:36, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge into Lawrence Fishburne with a paragraph on the behavior/his response. The Rhymesmith (talk) 15:44, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:09, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:10, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge per The Rhymesmith --Waldir talk 07:13, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep There is nothing that separates her from any other pornographic actor or actress and the rules of of WP:PORNBIO are subjective at best DRCarroll 03:43, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 08:23, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep This individual satisfies WP:GNG in my books. comment added by User:BarraganLL — BarraganLL (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete per nomination rationale. 70.241.19.79 (talk) 09:04, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge I can not vote for keep at this time because her notability is only based on her last name. There is indeed significant coverage by reliable sources but only for beeing the "bad" daughter of a famous actor. So even if there are currenty several articles about the conflict with her father and the consequences, even over several weeks, it's actually still WP:BLP1E at best and furthermore WP:NOTNEWS can be applied. Moreover if things have "cooled down" the article would probably not survive the next AfD. She has not done anything outstanding so far to my knowledge and also just started in the porn business, so there are also no awards or any other special coverage. On the other hand the rather significant media response should not totally be ignored. But because it is only significant because of her famous father, it should be merged with his article and maybe redirect could be added. Testales (talk) 09:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge. The Ogre (talk) 12:23, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Morpheus' daughter? I wonder how is her acting? Lionel (talk) 01:55, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep I believe this satisfies the general notability guideline. 24.222.124.252 (talk) 04:37, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Once again *keep. considering some of the ridiculous minutia that Wiki keeps on its books such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Archer, an entirely fictional person it can be at least said that Fishburne is an actual person and had a pulse. Having an attack of collective conscience with regards to "noteworthiness" at this point seems to be of little valueDRCarroll 20:19, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, 172,229 page views so far this month. Abductive (reasoning) 05:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's probably one of the most illogical rationales I have seen. Whose Your Guy (talk) 13:50, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete — fails WP:PORNBIO and is just visible because of her father. Favonian (talk) 13:59, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Fails applicable notability guidelines, fails GNG as NOTNEWS/ONEEVENT control. Not a suitable merge candidate because there's no sourced, reliable material relating to her father beyond the simple fact of the biological relationship. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 21:33, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Montana_Fishburne&oldid=1087620263"